WASHINGTON -- It appears that one vehicle for members of Congress seeking to delay flood insurance premium increases -- adding an amendment to a pending defense authorization bill -- is now off the table.

House and Senate negotiators announced Monday afternoon an agreement on a defense authorization bill that they hope both chambers will enact before Congress breaks for the Christmas and New Year's holiday.

The agreement would preclude amendments, such as the proposal to delay for four years flood insurance premium increases resulting from the Biggert-Waters 2012 legislation. Sponsors of the delaying legislation say it's needed because constituents are reporting flood insurance premium increases of two, three, even 10 times current rates, and they vow to find another way to gain passage.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said the House is expected to pass the defense bill this week, before it breaks for the remainder of 2013, leaving the only option passage of the identical bill by the Senate the following week.

"This is the only way we can pass the bill," said Levin, who added that it is critical to the nation's military forces that the legislation establishing Pentagon policies and spending levels be passed before the end of the year. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Ok., the committee's top Republican, agreed that the only option now is for Congress to enact the defense bill without new amendments.

The legislation authorizes $552.1 billion in spending for national defense and an additional $80.7 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations. It includes a 1 percent increase in military pay.

The negotiated bill reforms the military's handling of sexual assault cases, taking away from military commanders the authority to overrule the findings of a court martial.

But the agreement scuttles efforts by Louisiana lawmakers to add the flood insurance delaying measure to the must-pass defense bill.

"The National Defense Authorization Act was never our only vehicle to address the very real issue of skyrocketing flood insurance rates, so I am certainly not deterred," said Rep. Cedric Richmond, D-New Orleans. "With a bipartisan, bicameral coalition of members of Congress supporting our efforts, the will to find a solution is certainly there."

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., has made similar comments, saying the defense bill was just one of several options being considered to move the flood insurance measure forward. "Support in the Senate continues to grow for the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act, and I'm confident that it will pass," Landrieu said.

The bill now has 24 Senate sponsors and co-sponsors, and 149 sponsors and co-sponsors in the House.

Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-Baton Rouge, who is running against Landrieu in the 2014 Senate race, said the House has already enacted a one-year delay, though it never got a Senate vote. He said he's working to get support for a lengthier delay from some leaders of the House Financial Services Committee who have expressed a reluctance to delay increases resulting from legislation enacted just one year ago to make the program more self-sufficient.

"I will continue to work with my House colleagues on both sides of the aisle to protect Louisiana home owners," Cassidy said.

The legislation delaying increases for four years and requiring FEMA to complete an affordability study within four years would benefit of the three following groups:

All homes and businesses that are currently "grandfathered." These are properties that were built to code and later remapped into a higher risk area. Before Biggert-Waters, these policyholders were not penalized for relying on inaccurate FEMA flood maps.

All properties that purchased a new policy after July 6, 2012, before they were legally required to buy insurance.

All properties sold after July 6, 2012. New homeowners and business owners will continue to receive the same treatment as the previous owner unless they trigger another provision in Biggert-Waters such as properties that were compensated for severe repetitive losses, and non-primary residences, including beach-front vacation homes.

The agreement on a new defense authorization bill between House and Senate leaders also means that Sen. David Vitter, R-La., likely won't get a vote on his amendment to bar the current federal subsidies for employee health insurance to continue for members of Congress and their staffs buying coverage under the Affordable Care Act's exchanges.

Vitter said that amounts to special treatment because private employees purchasing coverage through the exchanges can't get employer subsides. But some members of Congress argue the policy simply provides for members of Congress and their staffs to get the same subsidies provided for every other federal employee -- with the only difference that federal workers will get their insurance through the federal benefits program while most members of Congress and their staffs will go to the exchanges.

Most members and staffs were required to get their coverage through the exchanges as a result of an amendment to the Affordable Care Act added by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa., who argued that Congress should experience the same health care options provided to the public under the health care law.